Mangaed memory means that the OS stops you from doing bad things with pointers and don't allow you to allocate and free memory at your will. And this can be really good sometimes. But if they add garbage collection and managed memory to the API I get concerned that you would get problems with alot of code and loos power as a programmer. I might be wrong though. I don't know what they mean with new graphic sysyem but my guess would be that it have to do with some intelectual propert they recently bought from Sun(maker of OpenGL).

As an aside: I feel like I'm in a permenant stasis because Developers like microsoft and sun keep revamping langauges. I can barely get started learning one language before they decide it's not good enough. Where am I supposed to start?

I agree..I feel exactly the same way. I am just getting a understanding of C++ Api and MFC and now that is getting pushed to the side for C# and .NET. Ok maybe not that dramatic but sometimes I get that fealing.

garbage collection is exactly why java sucks, they take the power form you, its like haveing the Government cut your steak for you since you might hurt yourself with the knife.

Basically it comes down to this THEY OWN YOU, you depend on them because you can't do it yourself anymore and therefore your stuck to either waste money and resources trying to learn what you should know(and what will then will no longer be norm and not easily found) and be allowed to do, or to stick with them.

its basically about taking away your power and making you work only for them. its like with Government, and well everything else too.

bla bla bla, nobody cares anyway, why do i waste my time...

>Open GL! bah!

bah nothing, Direct-3D is not up to par and MS knows it, thats why they're trying to buy GL out.

Money, we all know MS has it and uses it to their advantage very well i might add.(as is their right)

BS, the lied extensively about the capabilities of the two when Direct-3D was made.

the next ones multipart,

Fraud,first before Direct-3D MS had an agreement with SGI to implement and update GL and distribute it with ever release of windows. when Direct-3D emerged and Direct-3D and GL first began competing all was in software, hardware support was just beginning, so MS in all their fradulent evil genius provided a purposly buggy and slow software implemetation of GL breaking their agreement with SGI, to "show" it was inferior slow and incabable of matchin Direct-3D

Result, Video Card vendors see this and jumped on it believing that the test was true,

Result, SGI gets ........ed and release their own implementation of GL for windows IT KICKS ASS, MS is show as evil and is forced to wright a half decent implementation (THAT IT HAS NEVER UPDATED ALSO BREAKING WITH THEIR AGREEMENT!), so eventually SGI gets so ........ed they give up on software GL for windows all together, and leave it to hardware, which just now is fully supporting GL,

Summary, due to MS's Trickery Direct-X got a huge headstart, even though OpenGL was Made LONG before.

Ignorance, MS's Disinformation people have done such a good job that many still believe that Direct-3D is faster and can do more, THIS IS ALSO BELONGS IN THE BS SECTION!(more MS BS
"OpenGL is really hard to learn" its vice versa GL is easy D-3D is hard), on an even implementation although the design goals were completely different(eg. GL(good looks then speed) D3D is just the opposite), OpenGL will still out perform Direct-X.

the tables are now turning and the truth is getting out, there are some big changes comming for GL(and i mean SOON) and there is no way Direct-X will be cabable of keeping up, people are switching overm Mixing the API's instead.

The further I delve into industry standards the more shocked and appalled I become. Thanks to $$ there will never be one one way of doing things.

In many ways, open GL seems like the answer. But it sounds so much like Java, it scares me. Code that works across multiple platforms is great, but every time a developer releases open source microsoft wants to buy it up. Why? Because it's true, they are anti-competitive. But what's wrong with that? There has to be an industry leader to set standards, and Microsoft has proven their ability for compatibility and adaptation an many occasions.

As a new developer, I don't want to have to worry about what the next developer may or may not release. I want one developer to keep things in uniform order. Now, because the developers of open GL have stirred up enough BS to scare microsoft, I may have to learn another API.

It doesn't really matter who was defrauded by who, that's just business. I'm sure all parties are to blame. Microsoft isn't the only devil out there. And I'm not saying I'm a microsoft fanboy either, but there have to be to be standards, and with everyone competing for the liscense to those standards it's never going to happen.

Anyway, if the rumor is true and directX is out the window(s), then I guess I'd better learn it.

But that is all it is, a rumor. The article only said "a new graphics" system. It said nothing about Open GL. Besides, just because microsoft implements the technology, dosen't mean the libraries or any of the keywords will be left intact. Kinda like what they did to Java with C#

I'll admitt, they are ruthless. No one ever got ahead by being nice all the time. This is a market economy

BTW ... developers, developers, developers, developers....

[rolls on the floor laughing]

I plan on attending the .NET release event in KC. It'll be my first microsoft event, and I'm very excited about it.

OpenGL is portable in the sense that C++ is portable, in the source level. Programs need to be recompiled to work on different platforms. Java is binary compatible, after compiling it once, you should be able to run the code on any platform with a java virtual machine, which is responsible for executing the code.

Source level compatibility costs little in terms of run time speed, binary compatibilty is usually a lot more costly.

OpenGL is portable in the sense that C++ is portable, in the source level.

How portable is my question. I'm still trying to understand all this confusing mess of portability. I guess i'm not alone because it seems to be a big issue with everyone.

Now, I understand how Java works. I thought this was how GL worked to, but I see I was wrong. So, let's say I wrote and and compiled GL code in VC 6, how difficult would it be to convert it for other operating systems? Is directX portable at all? If so, which would be easier to convert?